UPS nose gear collapse at Incheon
 

UPS has left the pavement aborting a takeoff on 33L at ICN around midnight. The tail is high in the air with apparent nose gear collapse. From 3km away it looks like a MD11. Thankfully it looks survivable. Local mechanics say the gear collapsed during RTO, although that could be lost in translation and an overrun into grass caused the collapse. If that was a Korean carrier the boys and girls would be in custody by now. Curiously, although the runway is clearly unusable, there is no NOTAM or comment on the ATIS- lots of folk requesting the usual landing runway and wondering why not. This must surely be Incheon's first accident.

Looks to me like the runway closure has been NOTAMed since 1418Z on June 6 (23:18 local ICN time on Monday night):

It's probably buried in the several pages of unusable VOR sectors and decommissioned NDB's. And a lot of printouts are in an even more cryptic format like this:

The runway closure really should be flagged in the paperwork but we all know that sometimes it isn't. And, a closed major runway should always be noted in the ATIS in my opinion.

This 'I've got a secret' stuff needs to stop but it is traditional and that's the way we've always done it etc...

And of course, if you miss the NOTAM somehow, we all know who's fault it is...

It's been a while but I've worked with former colleagues of the Canadian captain of the Korean Air A300 that ran off the runway at Cheju (now Jeju) in 1994. He had to be smuggled out of the country to avoid a possible prison term.

Jacdec has daylight photos
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkVHzKnWUAAWjoh.jpg
Jacdec.de

http://imgh.us/rsz_133531_201606071407481465276068.png

http://imgh.us/2016-06-06_N277UP_Md1...@RKSI_MAP1.png

RTO above V1?

They always say there's no such thing thing as a stupid question but are both the #1 & 3 nose inlet cowls missing? Considering how they are held on with multiple bolts the only way they would come off is if the fan frame fractured? On both sides?

If I'm not mistaken, you can see one of them in the photo, lying on the grass behind the aircraft (look under the starboard wing).

I imagine the inlets took quite the impact once the nose gear collapsed.

#1 looks like the pylon also got displaced.

Yup, looks odd to me too. There are normally a LOT of bolts. Even with the pylon damage.

Both covers are kaput, plus the right side of the #2 reverser (I don't have the picture of it). Don't know how that came off.

http://i.imgur.com/bpp3dTw.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/AGJouuU.jpg

This A/C went through some force... Not surprising... The nose is wrinkled as well.

Plenty more MD11's to re-activate from in the desert........

Didn't really need to pop the slid did he!! Pretty low already.....

ACMS

So its night, "he's" just had a fairly traumatic event and you want him to disarm the door! Don't be a Monday morning quarterback.

Was joking bud, chill.......

Be kind of hard to slide on though.....:E

It'll be interesting to see if they did a high-speed RTO because the nose gear collapsed, or did the nose gear collapse after a high-speed RTO went off the end?
(The initial report I saw said "nose gear collapsed during TO")

TD,

Just a quick glance from me, but I saw no markings on the runway, so maybe a collapse on the grass? He must have been going quite fast to make it that far into the overrun.

As noted by other posters, it now states the front landing gear collapsed on the runway excursion, not on TO...

Always interesting to see the split winglet on the old aircraft.....now the new advanced max split and scimitar et al...

(I wont even mention that the MD wing surface looks clean, a lot like the AB wing...and does not have rivets and vortex tabs! line B wings....)

Got a good look at it out the left window after liftoff yesterday
Must have really been 'movin. Clear past the approach lights.

They built 200, how many have been written off?

(Sorry I would have snapped a pic upon takeoff from 33R yesterday after gear retraction but that would have been so so unprofessional and contrary to FCOM).

Yes, that was my impression. 3,750m runway and to go that far on a soft surface dragging the nose and engines, I’d have guessed at least 80kts when they left the paved bit.

Brake/spoiler problem on RTO? Reject after V1 due unsafe/unable to fly? Whatever, must have been pretty scary... :eek:

According to the below Boeing document, page 19:

http://www.boeing.com/resources/boei...df/statsum.pdf

as of December 31, 2014 there have been 9 MD-11 hull losses, 5 with fatalities.

Not the best pic,but we can see that the nose rest on a trailer.

TOTAL RUMOR ALERT.

A comment (not the main article) on Aviation Herald hints at insider info from the operator suggesting a blown nose-gear tire at V1 that compromised an engine and some hydraulics, including brakes.

Sounds like one of those "it could never really happen" scenarios the sim-check guys throw at you - except maybe(?) it did?